MORGANTOWN, W. Va. — The announcement from the NCAA Division I Council to delay its decision on uniform transfer rules flew a bit under the radar last week.
That won’t be the case later this year. The NCAA announced in a press release that it had “approved a resolution that outlined its intention to adopt by January a comprehensive legislative package creating uniform, modernized rules governing eligibility after transfer for student-athletes in all sports.”
It’s being projected that athletes playing football, baseball, men’s hockey and men’s and women’s basketball will no longer have to sit out one season after transferring beginning as early as the 2021-22 academic year.
That has long been the rule for the majority of the Olympic sports, such as wrestling, track, volleyball, gymnastics and tennis, where athletes could transfer without the penalty of sitting out a season.
On the lower end of the spectrum of possibilities is the NCAA may decide to now force all Division I athletes, regardless of sport, to sit out one season after transferring, what the NCAA refers to as a residence requirement.
Why the two sets of rules in the first place?
Well, now we’re getting into maybe the biggest farce that the NCAA has ever offered into its rule book.
The NCAA’s uniformed explanation for the residence requirement is based, it says, on academics. The NCAA says those athletes need the sit-out season in order to adjust academically.
The problem is in the comparison.
A 20-year old football player and a 20-year old soccer player both transferring to new schools, under the NCAA’s current rules, are not viewed in the same fashion.
Does the soccer player not also need a year to adjust academically and maybe even socially?
The NCAA says ‘no,’ apparently believing that athletes in Olympic sports adjust much quicker than football and basketball players.
The real answer lies — as much as it does with just about everything else the NCAA does — in the money.
The sports making the money just can’t have players going willy-nilly.
There has to be some sort of competitive balance in place, because remember the NCAA’s marketing strategy is in having a stronger field of teams. It does not market itself on the strength of its athletes, much like the NBA has done for years.
If those players could simply be allowed to transfer without penalty and maybe all get together and form some super team for a year, well, that doesn’t bode well for the rest of the NCAA, especially if it happened more than a few times.
Put another way: Would you really be as interested in the NCAA men’s basketball tournament if the top 10 players in the country kept transferring to Duke and Kentucky every year?
Probably not and that means lower TV ratings, which means a smaller TV contract for the NCAA.
The argument made against that is that coaches are free to pick up and leave for another school almost at their leisure, so why can’t the players?
The best example may be Texas Tech men’s basketball coach Chris Beard, who in 2016, had signed a deal to become the head coach at UNLV. That was until he got a better offer from Texas Tech and Beard went with the Red Raiders after being at UNLV for all of two weeks.
Worked out well for Texas Tech. The Red Raiders have gone 94-44 in Beard’s four seasons, with an Elite Eight and a national runner-up showing, while UNLV has finished 65-63 with no NCAA tournament appearances in the same time frame.
It’s a valid argument, and quite honestly, there are no valid reasons to attempt to hold athletes at a school or force them to sit out a season when there are no limitations put on the coaches, other than buyouts in their contracts that are generally negotiated down once a coach decides to take another job.
Still, when there is money involved, crazy things can happen and for an organization like the NCAA, it’s never been in the business of doing crazy things.
M. Grace Calhoun, the chair of the Division I Council and the athletic director at the University of Pennsylvania said many options are still in play and that a transfer package will be put together in November in order for it to be voted on at the NCAA Convention next January.
“The transfer environment has long been an issue of much discussion in Division I,” Calhoun said. “The Division I Council is committed to a uniform and equitable approach to transfer rules that considers student-athlete well-being and the opportunities available after transfer. We will not simply change the rule, but we will consider a comprehensive package designed to address the multiple complexities involved.”
To me, that still sounds like the long shot may still be in play.
While it’s likely the NCAA will move to allow all college athletes the right to transfer without penalty, don’t be shocked if it goes the other way to make all transfers sit out one season and possibly even eliminate the waiver process along the way.
TWEET @bigjax3211
